Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research, ISSN - 0973 - 709X

Users Online : 43756

AbstractResultsDiscussionConclusionAcknowledgementReferencesDOI and Others
Article in PDF How to Cite Citation Manager Readers' Comments (0) Audio Visual Article Statistics Link to PUBMED Print this Article Send to a Friend
Advertisers Access Statistics Resources

Dr Mohan Z Mani

"Thank you very much for having published my article in record time.I would like to compliment you and your entire staff for your promptness, courtesy, and willingness to be customer friendly, which is quite unusual.I was given your reference by a colleague in pathology,and was able to directly phone your editorial office for clarifications.I would particularly like to thank the publication managers and the Assistant Editor who were following up my article. I would also like to thank you for adjusting the money I paid initially into payment for my modified article,and refunding the balance.
I wish all success to your journal and look forward to sending you any suitable similar article in future"



Dr Mohan Z Mani,
Professor & Head,
Department of Dermatolgy,
Believers Church Medical College,
Thiruvalla, Kerala
On Sep 2018




Prof. Somashekhar Nimbalkar

"Over the last few years, we have published our research regularly in Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research. Having published in more than 20 high impact journals over the last five years including several high impact ones and reviewing articles for even more journals across my fields of interest, we value our published work in JCDR for their high standards in publishing scientific articles. The ease of submission, the rapid reviews in under a month, the high quality of their reviewers and keen attention to the final process of proofs and publication, ensure that there are no mistakes in the final article. We have been asked clarifications on several occasions and have been happy to provide them and it exemplifies the commitment to quality of the team at JCDR."



Prof. Somashekhar Nimbalkar
Head, Department of Pediatrics, Pramukhswami Medical College, Karamsad
Chairman, Research Group, Charutar Arogya Mandal, Karamsad
National Joint Coordinator - Advanced IAP NNF NRP Program
Ex-Member, Governing Body, National Neonatology Forum, New Delhi
Ex-President - National Neonatology Forum Gujarat State Chapter
Department of Pediatrics, Pramukhswami Medical College, Karamsad, Anand, Gujarat.
On Sep 2018




Dr. Kalyani R

"Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research is at present a well-known Indian originated scientific journal which started with a humble beginning. I have been associated with this journal since many years. I appreciate the Editor, Dr. Hemant Jain, for his constant effort in bringing up this journal to the present status right from the scratch. The journal is multidisciplinary. It encourages in publishing the scientific articles from postgraduates and also the beginners who start their career. At the same time the journal also caters for the high quality articles from specialty and super-specialty researchers. Hence it provides a platform for the scientist and researchers to publish. The other aspect of it is, the readers get the information regarding the most recent developments in science which can be used for teaching, research, treating patients and to some extent take preventive measures against certain diseases. The journal is contributing immensely to the society at national and international level."



Dr Kalyani R
Professor and Head
Department of Pathology
Sri Devaraj Urs Medical College
Sri Devaraj Urs Academy of Higher Education and Research , Kolar, Karnataka
On Sep 2018




Dr. Saumya Navit

"As a peer-reviewed journal, the Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research provides an opportunity to researchers, scientists and budding professionals to explore the developments in the field of medicine and dentistry and their varied specialities, thus extending our view on biological diversities of living species in relation to medicine.
‘Knowledge is treasure of a wise man.’ The free access of this journal provides an immense scope of learning for the both the old and the young in field of medicine and dentistry as well. The multidisciplinary nature of the journal makes it a better platform to absorb all that is being researched and developed. The publication process is systematic and professional. Online submission, publication and peer reviewing makes it a user-friendly journal.
As an experienced dentist and an academician, I proudly recommend this journal to the dental fraternity as a good quality open access platform for rapid communication of their cutting-edge research progress and discovery.
I wish JCDR a great success and I hope that journal will soar higher with the passing time."



Dr Saumya Navit
Professor and Head
Department of Pediatric Dentistry
Saraswati Dental College
Lucknow
On Sep 2018




Dr. Arunava Biswas

"My sincere attachment with JCDR as an author as well as reviewer is a learning experience . Their systematic approach in publication of article in various categories is really praiseworthy.
Their prompt and timely response to review's query and the manner in which they have set the reviewing process helps in extracting the best possible scientific writings for publication.
It's a honour and pride to be a part of the JCDR team. My very best wishes to JCDR and hope it will sparkle up above the sky as a high indexed journal in near future."



Dr. Arunava Biswas
MD, DM (Clinical Pharmacology)
Assistant Professor
Department of Pharmacology
Calcutta National Medical College & Hospital , Kolkata




Dr. C.S. Ramesh Babu
" Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research (JCDR) is a multi-specialty medical and dental journal publishing high quality research articles in almost all branches of medicine. The quality of printing of figures and tables is excellent and comparable to any International journal. An added advantage is nominal publication charges and monthly issue of the journal and more chances of an article being accepted for publication. Moreover being a multi-specialty journal an article concerning a particular specialty has a wider reach of readers of other related specialties also. As an author and reviewer for several years I find this Journal most suitable and highly recommend this Journal."
Best regards,
C.S. Ramesh Babu,
Associate Professor of Anatomy,
Muzaffarnagar Medical College,
Muzaffarnagar.
On Aug 2018




Dr. Arundhathi. S
"Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research (JCDR) is a reputed peer reviewed journal and is constantly involved in publishing high quality research articles related to medicine. Its been a great pleasure to be associated with this esteemed journal as a reviewer and as an author for a couple of years. The editorial board consists of many dedicated and reputed experts as its members and they are doing an appreciable work in guiding budding researchers. JCDR is doing a commendable job in scientific research by promoting excellent quality research & review articles and case reports & series. The reviewers provide appropriate suggestions that improve the quality of articles. I strongly recommend my fraternity to encourage JCDR by contributing their valuable research work in this widely accepted, user friendly journal. I hope my collaboration with JCDR will continue for a long time".



Dr. Arundhathi. S
MBBS, MD (Pathology),
Sanjay Gandhi institute of trauma and orthopedics,
Bengaluru.
On Aug 2018




Dr. Mamta Gupta,
"It gives me great pleasure to be associated with JCDR, since last 2-3 years. Since then I have authored, co-authored and reviewed about 25 articles in JCDR. I thank JCDR for giving me an opportunity to improve my own skills as an author and a reviewer.
It 's a multispecialty journal, publishing high quality articles. It gives a platform to the authors to publish their research work which can be available for everyone across the globe to read. The best thing about JCDR is that the full articles of all medical specialties are available as pdf/html for reading free of cost or without institutional subscription, which is not there for other journals. For those who have problem in writing manuscript or do statistical work, JCDR comes for their rescue.
The journal has a monthly publication and the articles are published quite fast. In time compared to other journals. The on-line first publication is also a great advantage and facility to review one's own articles before going to print. The response to any query and permission if required, is quite fast; this is quite commendable. I have a very good experience about seeking quick permission for quoting a photograph (Fig.) from a JCDR article for my chapter authored in an E book. I never thought it would be so easy. No hassles.
Reviewing articles is no less a pain staking process and requires in depth perception, knowledge about the topic for review. It requires time and concentration, yet I enjoy doing it. The JCDR website especially for the reviewers is quite user friendly. My suggestions for improving the journal is, more strict review process, so that only high quality articles are published. I find a a good number of articles in Obst. Gynae, hence, a new journal for this specialty titled JCDR-OG can be started. May be a bimonthly or quarterly publication to begin with. Only selected articles should find a place in it.
An yearly reward for the best article authored can also incentivize the authors. Though the process of finding the best article will be not be very easy. I do not know how reviewing process can be improved. If an article is being reviewed by two reviewers, then opinion of one can be communicated to the other or the final opinion of the editor can be communicated to the reviewer if requested for. This will help one’s reviewing skills.
My best wishes to Dr. Hemant Jain and all the editorial staff of JCDR for their untiring efforts to bring out this journal. I strongly recommend medical fraternity to publish their valuable research work in this esteemed journal, JCDR".



Dr. Mamta Gupta
Consultant
(Ex HOD Obs &Gynae, Hindu Rao Hospital and associated NDMC Medical College, Delhi)
Aug 2018




Dr. Rajendra Kumar Ghritlaharey

"I wish to thank Dr. Hemant Jain, Editor-in-Chief Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research (JCDR), for asking me to write up few words.
Writing is the representation of language in a textual medium i e; into the words and sentences on paper. Quality medical manuscript writing in particular, demands not only a high-quality research, but also requires accurate and concise communication of findings and conclusions, with adherence to particular journal guidelines. In medical field whether working in teaching, private, or in corporate institution, everyone wants to excel in his / her own field and get recognised by making manuscripts publication.


Authors are the souls of any journal, and deserve much respect. To publish a journal manuscripts are needed from authors. Authors have a great responsibility for producing facts of their work in terms of number and results truthfully and an individual honesty is expected from authors in this regards. Both ways its true "No authors-No manuscripts-No journals" and "No journals–No manuscripts–No authors". Reviewing a manuscript is also a very responsible and important task of any peer-reviewed journal and to be taken seriously. It needs knowledge on the subject, sincerity, honesty and determination. Although the process of reviewing a manuscript is a time consuming task butit is expected to give one's best remarks within the time frame of the journal.
Salient features of the JCDR: It is a biomedical, multidisciplinary (including all medical and dental specialities), e-journal, with wide scope and extensive author support. At the same time, a free text of manuscript is available in HTML and PDF format. There is fast growing authorship and readership with JCDR as this can be judged by the number of articles published in it i e; in Feb 2007 of its first issue, it contained 5 articles only, and now in its recent volume published in April 2011, it contained 67 manuscripts. This e-journal is fulfilling the commitments and objectives sincerely, (as stated by Editor-in-chief in his preface to first edition) i e; to encourage physicians through the internet, especially from the developing countries who witness a spectrum of disease and acquire a wealth of knowledge to publish their experiences to benefit the medical community in patients care. I also feel that many of us have work of substance, newer ideas, adequate clinical materials but poor in medical writing and hesitation to submit the work and need help. JCDR provides authors help in this regards.
Timely publication of journal: Publication of manuscripts and bringing out the issue in time is one of the positive aspects of JCDR and is possible with strong support team in terms of peer reviewers, proof reading, language check, computer operators, etc. This is one of the great reasons for authors to submit their work with JCDR. Another best part of JCDR is "Online first Publications" facilities available for the authors. This facility not only provides the prompt publications of the manuscripts but at the same time also early availability of the manuscripts for the readers.
Indexation and online availability: Indexation transforms the journal in some sense from its local ownership to the worldwide professional community and to the public.JCDR is indexed with Embase & EMbiology, Google Scholar, Index Copernicus, Chemical Abstracts Service, Journal seek Database, Indian Science Abstracts, to name few of them. Manuscriptspublished in JCDR are available on major search engines ie; google, yahoo, msn.
In the era of fast growing newer technologies, and in computer and internet friendly environment the manuscripts preparation, submission, review, revision, etc and all can be done and checked with a click from all corer of the world, at any time. Of course there is always a scope for improvement in every field and none is perfect. To progress, one needs to identify the areas of one's weakness and to strengthen them.
It is well said that "happy beginning is half done" and it fits perfectly with JCDR. It has grown considerably and I feel it has already grown up from its infancy to adolescence, achieving the status of standard online e-journal form Indian continent since its inception in Feb 2007. This had been made possible due to the efforts and the hard work put in it. The way the JCDR is improving with every new volume, with good quality original manuscripts, makes it a quality journal for readers. I must thank and congratulate Dr Hemant Jain, Editor-in-Chief JCDR and his team for their sincere efforts, dedication, and determination for making JCDR a fast growing journal.
Every one of us: authors, reviewers, editors, and publisher are responsible for enhancing the stature of the journal. I wish for a great success for JCDR."



Thanking you
With sincere regards
Dr. Rajendra Kumar Ghritlaharey, M.S., M. Ch., FAIS
Associate Professor,
Department of Paediatric Surgery, Gandhi Medical College & Associated
Kamla Nehru & Hamidia Hospitals Bhopal, Madhya Pradesh 462 001 (India)
E-mail: drrajendrak1@rediffmail.com
On May 11,2011




Dr. Shankar P.R.

"On looking back through my Gmail archives after being requested by the journal to write a short editorial about my experiences of publishing with the Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research (JCDR), I came across an e-mail from Dr. Hemant Jain, Editor, in March 2007, which introduced the new electronic journal. The main features of the journal which were outlined in the e-mail were extensive author support, cash rewards, the peer review process, and other salient features of the journal.
Over a span of over four years, we (I and my colleagues) have published around 25 articles in the journal. In this editorial, I plan to briefly discuss my experiences of publishing with JCDR and the strengths of the journal and to finally address the areas for improvement.
My experiences of publishing with JCDR: Overall, my experiences of publishing withJCDR have been positive. The best point about the journal is that it responds to queries from the author. This may seem to be simple and not too much to ask for, but unfortunately, many journals in the subcontinent and from many developing countries do not respond or they respond with a long delay to the queries from the authors 1. The reasons could be many, including lack of optimal secretarial and other support. Another problem with many journals is the slowness of the review process. Editorial processing and peer review can take anywhere between a year to two years with some journals. Also, some journals do not keep the contributors informed about the progress of the review process. Due to the long review process, the articles can lose their relevance and topicality. A major benefit with JCDR is the timeliness and promptness of its response. In Dr Jain's e-mail which was sent to me in 2007, before the introduction of the Pre-publishing system, he had stated that he had received my submission and that he would get back to me within seven days and he did!
Most of the manuscripts are published within 3 to 4 months of their submission if they are found to be suitable after the review process. JCDR is published bimonthly and the accepted articles were usually published in the next issue. Recently, due to the increased volume of the submissions, the review process has become slower and it ?? Section can take from 4 to 6 months for the articles to be reviewed. The journal has an extensive author support system and it has recently introduced a paid expedited review process. The journal also mentions the average time for processing the manuscript under different submission systems - regular submission and expedited review.
Strengths of the journal: The journal has an online first facility in which the accepted manuscripts may be published on the website before being included in a regular issue of the journal. This cuts down the time between their acceptance and the publication. The journal is indexed in many databases, though not in PubMed. The editorial board should now take steps to index the journal in PubMed. The journal has a system of notifying readers through e-mail when a new issue is released. Also, the articles are available in both the HTML and the PDF formats. I especially like the new and colorful page format of the journal. Also, the access statistics of the articles are available. The prepublication and the manuscript tracking system are also helpful for the authors.
Areas for improvement: In certain cases, I felt that the peer review process of the manuscripts was not up to international standards and that it should be strengthened. Also, the number of manuscripts in an issue is high and it may be difficult for readers to go through all of them. The journal can consider tightening of the peer review process and increasing the quality standards for the acceptance of the manuscripts. I faced occasional problems with the online manuscript submission (Pre-publishing) system, which have to be addressed.
Overall, the publishing process with JCDR has been smooth, quick and relatively hassle free and I can recommend other authors to consider the journal as an outlet for their work."



Dr. P. Ravi Shankar
KIST Medical College, P.O. Box 14142, Kathmandu, Nepal.
E-mail: ravi.dr.shankar@gmail.com
On April 2011
Anuradha

Dear team JCDR, I would like to thank you for the very professional and polite service provided by everyone at JCDR. While i have been in the field of writing and editing for sometime, this has been my first attempt in publishing a scientific paper.Thank you for hand-holding me through the process.


Dr. Anuradha
E-mail: anuradha2nittur@gmail.com
On Jan 2020

Important Notice

Original article / research
Year : 2022 | Month : May | Volume : 16 | Issue : 5 | Page : JC01 - JC04 Full Version

Knowledge and Perception of Faculty towards Competency Based Medical Education: A Cross-sectional Study


Published: May 1, 2022 | DOI: https://doi.org/10.7860/JCDR/2022/54924.16300
Manisha Upadhyay, Sandeep Shrivastava, Mohamad Arshad, Ankit Srivastava, Anand Bihari

1. Professor and Head, Department of Anatomy, Government Medical College, Azamgarh, Uttar Pradesh, India. 2. Professor and Head, Department of Orthopaedics, Jawaharlal Nehru Medical College, Wardha, Maharastara, India. 3. Associate Professor, Department of Ophthalmology, Government Medical College, Azamgarh, Uttar Pradesh, India. 4. Assistant Professor, Department of Anatomy, Government Medical College, Azamgarh, Uttar Pradesh, India. 5. Statistician Cum Assistant Professor, Department of Community Medicine, Government Medical College, Azamgarh, Uttar Pradesh, India.

Correspondence Address :
Dr. Anand Bihari,
Flat No. F3 Type-III, Block-I, Government Medical College, Azamgarh, Uttar Pradesh, India.
E-mail: anandbhu05@gmail.com

Abstract

Introduction: Competency-Based Medical Education (CBME) is newly transformed education system in India to enhance five major qualities in doctors like, clinician, communicator, leader, life-long learner and professional. The CBME was launched in 2019 in all Medical Institution of India to uniform one’s knowledge, skills and a new domain Affection but this newly reformed system need hike in manpower, infrastructure, budget and technology which is a dilemmatic thought.

Aim: To perceive the acceptance of the faculty participants about CBME system and also to explore various domains including the efficiency of training orientation/ sensitization, sufficiency of knowledge about CBME, infrastructure, manpower and finance required and strategies or implementation.

Materials and Methods: This cross-sectional study was conducted in Government Medical College, Azamgarh, Uttar Pradesh, India, from January 2020 to July 2020. Total 60 participants were included in the study. The study used a validated set of questions about CBME. The assessed domains were competency definition, difference between traditional and new curriculum, merits and demerits of CBME, stages of competence and strategies to implement. Descriptive statistics were used to describe the data using Microsoft Excel.

Results: Total 60 (39 trained+21 untrained faculty) were included in the study, with maximum 28 (46.67%) were aged between 30-40 years {male were 38 (63.33%) and 22 (36.67%) were females}. Total 37 faculties knows “what is competency”, 37 participants responded for difference between CBME and traditional Medical education, 22 participants responded for stages of competency, 22 responded on steps and strategy for its implementation, 38% answered on merits and demerit of current curriculum.

Conclusion: The sufficiency of knowledge of CBME can be easily judged by proportion of responses of Open ended questions which was not more than 50% faculty for all questions. Closed ended questions have suggested that infrastructure, manpower and finance are not up to mark to implement CBME.

Keywords

Curriculum implementation, Revised medical education programme, Outcome based approach

Competency-Based Medical Education (CBME) is newly transformed education system in India to enhance five major qualities in doctors like, clinician, communicator, leader, life-long learner and professional. The CBME is an outcome-based approach; the emphasis is given on the end product rather than the educational process. CBME focuses on “mastery learning” to help the learner acquire competencies needed for doing the professional tasks and duties in health care; hence it is better and more efficient from traditional education (1). As the learning has changed likely assessment is also reframed in terms of robustness and multifaceted which facilitates a process that can synthesize the results of longitudinal and developmental assessment into a more comprehensive and holistic evaluation (2).

To change from traditional to new competency based curriculum it becomes very important to evaluate its perspectives from all the horizons. Inadequacy of Faculty and acceptance of various component of CBME as Reflective learning, early clinical exposure, elective posting Integrating various Departments vertically and horizontally are varying (3). Various Previous studies have been conducted on CBME and its change from Traditional curricula and merits with demerits (1),(4) but few studies (5),(6),(7),(8) are done on the survey of its acceptance, awareness and challenges e.g. infrastructure, Manpower, Finance etc. regionally. The Curriculum Implementation Support Program (CISP II): Second Year Report has clearly mentioned about number of regional and nodal centers with trained faculty which reflect the seriousness of Health policy makers about launch CBME (9). To explore about faculty perception about CBME, the present study was planned in Uttar Pradesh at various Medical Colleges and assess the knowledge of the participants about competency-based medical education and its various aspects. The domains of perception were efficiency of training orientation/ sensitization, sufficiency of knowledge infrastructure, manpower and finance required for CBME implementation and assess their strategies to implement it.

Inclusion criteria: Only faculties were included in the study were Assistant Professor, Associate Professor and Professor.

Exclusion criteria: Junior Residents, Tutors/Demonstrators and Senior Residents were excluded

Procedure

A descriptive qualitative study of 6 months duration was conducted among the faculty members of the different Medical Colleges. Non-probability purposive sampling was employed in the study. Free listing was done initially to elicit the views of faculty members to meet the intended objectives.

It was conducted on total 60 participants out of those 39 were trained with Revised Medical Education Technology (R-MET) and Curriculum Implementation Supporting Program (CISP) for implementation of new curriculum based teaching (CBME) and 21 were untrained. The study was conducted on medical faculty from seven Medical Colleges of Uttar Pradesh.

The self-administered questionnaire which was validated by two faculties involved in Medical education Unit (MEU) at institutional level after discussion with trained and untrained faculties and the questions were focusing on knowledge, merits and demerits of CBME, its implementation, Rationale with expected outcome. The questions were distributed through email and responses were collected. The questionnaire includes 15 closed ended questions and 5 open ended questions which were devised by authors. While interpreting closed ended questionnaire, in question number 1 and 13, A,B,C are decoded along the questions only and in all other questions A,B,C are Yes, No, No idea respectively. The decoded date were entered in excel sheet and responses counted in tabular form.

Statistical Analysis

Descriptive statistics were used to describe the data, which were represented as graphs and frequency distributions using MS Excel. Qualitative data analysed using qualitative approached.

Results

The maximum faculty 28 (46.67%) were aged between 30-40 years with male 38 (63.33%) and 22 (36.67%) were females. Total 45 faculty members were from Preclinical Department (Table/Fig 1).

Out of 60 cases, multiple responses for competency based medical education were given. It concluded that 37 (61.67%) faculties know what is competency, 37 (61.67) participants responded for difference between CBME and traditional medical education, 22 (36.67) Participants responded for stages of competency, 22 (36.67%) responded on steps and strategy for its implementation, 38 (63.33%) answered on merits and demerit of current curriculum (Table/Fig 2).

Responses of open ended questions obtained from faculties:

1. “Define Competency”. Competency is an expertise or skill of acceptable norms/standards developed through a predetermined process of learning and practice OR observable ability of a health professional, integrating multiple components such as knowledge, skills, values and attitudes OR competency is defined on the ability to do something successfully and efficiently.
2. How the CBME is different from traditional medical education? (Table/Fig 3).
3. Explain four stages of competence (learning)?
i. Unconscious incompetence: The individual does not understand or know how to do something and does not necessarily recognize the deficit.
ii. Conscious incompetence: Though the individual does not understand or know how to do something, he/she does recognize the deficit, as well as the value of a new skill in addressing the deficit.
iii. Conscious competence: The individual understands or knows how to do something. However, demonstrating the skill or knowledge requires concentration.
iv. Unconscious competence: The individual has had so much practice with the skill that it has become ‘second nature’ and can be performed easily(10).
4. What are steps and strategies for implementation?

Identification of competences, identification of the content and program organization, planning for assessment and program evaluation OR Assessment program with emphasis on WPBA (Work place Based Assessment) methods and an outcomes evaluation program is required as the final step of CBME implementation.

5. Viewpoint on merits and demerits of current curriculum? (Table/Fig 4)

Response of close ended questions: The results demonstrated that 36 (60%) faculty supported the combination of CBME and traditional curricula with less interest to implement it and even they say that it overburden the faculty academically and it need of increment in infrastructure and finance to launch it. Out of 60, 51 (85%) faculties are aware about expected competencies on Indian Medical graduate and agreed that CBME will improve medical education but around 31 (51.6 %) faculty think that they are not prepared for implementation but at the same time 45 (75%) have been noticed that CBME is beneficial for students. 53 (88%) faculties know their responsibility in CBME and support alignment and integration. About technology, many faculties don’t know about Netiquette and 50-50 responses for virtual class acceptance. In question 13, there are mixed opinion about Teaching-learning methods, 30 (50%) faculty feels Power Point (PPT) presentation, 13 (21.6 %) chalk and talk and 17 (28.3 %) has given its depend upon topic (Table/Fig 5).

Discussion

In the present study, it was observed that out of 60 cases, multiple responses for competency based medical education were given. For the open ended questions the number of responses were varies like 37 faculties knows “what is competency”, 37 for difference between CBME and traditional Medical education, 22 participants for stages of competency, 22 responded on steps and strategy for its implementation, 38% answered on merits and demerits of current curriculum. The knowledge on stages of competency and strategy to implement was lesser. Frank J et al., had proposed the significant implications for the planning of Medical curricula to reshape it (4). Modi J et al., emphasized to promote orientation and training for faculty regarding entrustment and assessment part of CBME which is actually crucial to make CBME strong (11). The positive response regarding CBME is shown in study by Telang A et al., (12) whereas the current article has shown less positive response to implement because of low manpower, infrastructure and finance. Rustagi et al., reported the ratio of trained and untrained faculties and gathered various suggestions about small group teaching, topic of electives, mode of seminars etc (6).

According to Teli A et al., Coordination between the Preclinical, Para clinical and clinical departments and proper lesson plan are factors responsible for effective implementation whereas inadequate faculty training and unanticipated holidays are the challenges for implementation (7). Study by Shrivastava S and Shrivastava P, revealed about entrustable professional activities and their assessment tools are crucial areas in CBME (8). To implement the CBME, the competency for faculty also need to be defined and they should progress from ‘knows’ level to ‘does’ level through longitudinal faculty development programm as mentioned by Nagarala M and Devi R in their study (13). Study by Selva P and Rithikaa M, discussed a genuine view on its need at global and national level and concluded that gradual acceptance and this time taking process will evolved into robust change in quality of medical education (14). To solve issues of CBME, there is lot to be done for faculties in the form of various Faculty Development Program (FDP) and motivate them.

Limitation(s)

Lesser number of participants and compilation of responses of open ended questions are two main limitations of this in study for which improvement is required.

Conclusion

The above results showed that still there is lack of knowledge and awareness about CBME which is alarming because until we are not thorough, we cannot implement it successfully. The training program as CISP or revised MET has definitely improved quality of faculty but still there is much more to be done to motivate. The sufficiency of knowledge of CBME can be easily judged by proportion of responses of Open ended questions which was not more than 50% faculty for all questions. Closed ended questions have suggested that infrastructure, manpower and finance are not up to mark to implement CBME. Keeping all above points in mind, Faculty must assess their respective available set up and start bridging the situation between "what we have and what we don't have".

Acknowledgement

Authors would like to thanks all faculty members who supported this research, Junior Residents and non-teaching staffs of Anatomy Department Government Medical College, Azamgarh, Uttar Pradesh, India.

References

1.
Bhutani N, Arora D, Bhutani N. Competency-Based Medical Education in India: A Brief Review. International Journal of Recent Innovations in Medicine and Clinical Research. 2020;2(2):64-70.
2.
Holmboe E, Sherbino J, Long D, Swing S Frank J. The role of assessment in competency-based medical education. Medical Teacher. 2010;32:676-682. [crossref] [PubMed]
3.
Ramanathan R, Shanmugam J, Sridhar M , Palanisamy K, Narayanan S. Exploring faculty perspectives on competency.based medical education: A report from India. Journal of Education and Health Promotion. 2021;10:01-06.
4.
Frank J, Snell L, Cate O, Holmboe E, Carraccio C, Swing S. Competency based Medical Education: theory to practice. Medical Teacher. 2010;32(8):638-45. [crossref] [PubMed]
5.
Shah N, Desai C, Jorwekar G,Badyal D, Singh T. Competency Based Medical Education: An overview and application in Pharmacology. Indian Journal of Pharmacology. 2016;48:S5-S9. [crossref] [PubMed]
6.
Rustogi S, Mohan C, Verma N, Nair B. Competency-based Medical Education: The Perceptions of Faculty. Journal of Medical Academics. 2019;2(1):01-05. [crossref]
7.
Teli A , Harakuni S, Kamat C. Quantitative and qualitative evaluation of perception of medical faculty toward competency.based medical education for undergraduate curriculum. BLDE University Journal of Health Sciences. 2021;6(2):143-49. [crossref]
8.
Shrivastava S, Shrivastava P. Qualitative study to identify the perception and challenges faced by the faculty of community medicine in the implementation of competency-based medical education for postgraduate students. Family Medicine & Community Health. 2019;7:01-06. [crossref] [PubMed]
9.
National Medical Commission. Curriculum Implementation Support Program (CISP II): Second Year Report, 2021 (pp. 1-53).
10.
Flower J. four stages of competencies, in the mush: Physician Exec. Jan-Feb 1999;25(1):64-66.
11.
Modi J, Gupta P, Singh T. Competency-Based Medical Education, Entrustment And Assessment. Indian Pediatr. 2015;52:413-20. [crossref] [PubMed]
12.
Telang A, Ratho S, Supe A, Nebhinani N, Mathai S. Faculty views on competency- Based medical education during mentoring and learning web sessions: An observational study. Journal of Education Technology in Health Sciences. 2017;4 (1):09-13.
13.
Nagarala M, Devi R. Faculty development programs for implementing competency based medical education in India: challenges and opportunities. International Journal of Community Medicine and Public Health.2021;8(6):3163-3166. [crossref]
14.
Selva P, Rithikaa M. Perspectives of Students and Teaching Faculty Members towards the New MBBS Curriculum in a Tertiary Care Hospital in Chennai. International Journal of Current Research and Review. 2021;13(8):120-126. [crossref]

DOI and Others

DOI: 10.7860/JCDR/2022/54924.16300

Date of Submission: Jan 15, 2022
Date of Peer Review: Feb 21, 2022
Date of Acceptance: Apr 14, 2022
Date of Publishing: May 01, 2022

AUTHOR DECLARATION:
• Financial or Other Competing Interests: None
• Was Ethics Committee Approval obtained for this study? Yes
• Was informed consent obtained from the subjects involved in the study? Yes
• For any images presented appropriate consent has been obtained from the subjects. NA

PLAGIARISM CHECKING METHODS:
• Plagiarism X-checker: Jan 17, 2022
• Manual Googling: Feb 11, 2022
• iThenticate Software: Apr 23, 2022 (18%)

ETYMOLOGY: Author Origin

JCDR is now Monthly and more widely Indexed .
  • Emerging Sources Citation Index (Web of Science, thomsonreuters)
  • Index Copernicus ICV 2017: 134.54
  • Academic Search Complete Database
  • Directory of Open Access Journals (DOAJ)
  • Embase
  • EBSCOhost
  • Google Scholar
  • HINARI Access to Research in Health Programme
  • Indian Science Abstracts (ISA)
  • Journal seek Database
  • Google
  • Popline (reproductive health literature)
  • www.omnimedicalsearch.com